LAST night, in his Oval Office address, President Bush graciously gave his critics their proper due – even as he was putting them in a strategic and ideological box from which they will not be able to escape.

Yes, he said, we went to war believing that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, and much of the intelligence proved to be wrong. Yes, he said, the war has been more difficult than his administration expected it would be.

And yes, he said, there is a serious argument against his entire approach in Iraq and the War on Terror that cannot simply be dismissed. The loss of life and limb in Iraq “has led some to ask if we are creating more problems than we are solving.”

He called that question “important,” and said “the answer depends on your view of the War on Terror.”

Those killing and maiming American troops include foreign terrorists, which has made Iraq a battlefield in the terror war. “If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone,” he said.

This is a very simple, but ultimately accurate, reflection of a strain of so-called “realist” thought that courses through the non-psycho criticisms of the Bush administration policy. We are under attack, according to this line of thinking, because we are being provocative towards our attackers.

“This,” Bush said, “is not the threat I see.” The threat he sees is from a “global terrorist movement that exploits Islam in the service of radical political aims.” The terrorists he fears “view the world as a giant battlefield – and they seek to attack us wherever they can. . . . And if we were not fighting them in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Southeast Asia and in other places, the terrorists would not be peaceful citizens. They would be on the offense, and headed our way.” After all, when we were attacked on 9/11, we were not in Afghanistan, or Iraq.

“My conviction comes down to this,” Bush said. “We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.”

Thus, in a gesture rare for any president, did Bush fairly summarize criticism of his policy and then attempt to rebut it in a straightforward and humble fashion.

“I have heard your disagreement, and I know how deeply it is felt,” he said to his critics. “Yet now there are only two options before our country – victory or defeat.”

If you want to think I’ve done the country wrong by getting us into this war, Bush was saying, that is your right. But now that we’re in it, we have to win it. Victory should be a goal supported by all Americans because defeat would mean a win for terrorists, the abandonment of those in Iraq who have risked their lives to work toward democracy, and the undermining of all our military has sought to achieve there.

The good news, he said, is that “not only can we win the war in Iraq – we are winning the war in Iraq.”

The Iraqi election on Thursday followed months of new successes in fighting foreign terrorists and Saddamists. “For every scene of destruction in Iraq,” the president said, “there are more scenes of rebuilding and hope. For every life lost, there are countless more lives reclaimed. And for every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq, there are many more Iraqis and Americans working to defeat them.”

Efforts in Iraq have improved because “we have learned from our experiences, and fixed what has not worked. We will continue to listen to honest criticism.”

And then, having painstakingly constructed his relentlessly fair argument, he then turned it back on his critics with airtight logic.

“There is a difference,” he said, “between honest critics who recognize what is wrong, and defeatists who refuse to see that anything is right. Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts.”

Thus, the president was saying, I hereby acknowledge both my mistakes and my responsibility for the decisions I’ve made. You have every right to blame me and hold me liable if you think the choice was the wrong one. You may even make “partisan use” of the war if you wish.

But in the end, “the need for victory is larger than any president or political party.” In the end, “the security of our people is in the balance.” Hate me. But if you love America and its brave men and women in uniform, you will agree with me that “the road to victory . . . is the road that will take them home.”